17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #26

[cityslick]

Well I'm not sure what happened to the post, nor do I know who posted it, but I think this SYG law should be taken out of the streets. I think change to the "Retreat to the Wall" part makes no sense, especially when you're standing in an open field. If you're in your home, and you have gone as far as you, then shoot the intruder, in this case you know he's up to no good, but when someone is just out for a walk, and you think something about this person does not look "right" then all you have to do is shoot him, no questions aske, no arrest. Makes no sense, not to me anyway. I sure hope changes are in the works for this crazy law.

I think SYG has a place, but it needs to be more strictly defined. If you are about to get jumped by one or more people, looking to rob/hurt/rape you, you should have every right to defend yourself from your attacker to the point of disabling them, even if that means death. For example, this case:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66013"]Eve Carson, 22, shot to death, Chapel Hill, NC #3 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

Now it ended tragically, but if Eve was carrying a gun, she would have every right to kill the two people that were robbing her, because the end result would of been (and was) her life.

 

[magnolia]

Trayvon was minding his own business walking home from the store. Zimmerman took it upon himself to chase/follow him after being told not to (or are we going to argue that again, too?). Trayvon had every reason to be frightened and every right to defend himself from being followed and accosted by a total stranger.

How can Zimmerman be in a position of defending himself when he was the one that put himself in that postion to begin with?


:banghead:

IMO

That would be a good question for Richard Hornsby.

Perhaps when he visits the forum again, he will explain the SYG to you and how the law may apply to your question.

 

[CathyinTexas]

What's your problem, homes? That doesn't even sound like something a teenager would say. I don't even think "homes" is even used by teenagers anymore, unless I'm wrong?

And actually, wasn't GZ's cellphone already out? I know exactly what he was reaching for, and it wasn't a cellphone. Good Lord. What a unbelievable story. Yes, please take this to court and see how it plays out, GZ. I hope your lawyer is more competent than you and your family and friends' storytelling abilities!

If that story is what he told police then will it be admissable in the trial? I hope they read him his Miranda rights.

 

[CathyinTexas]

This is exactly why I wonder if GZ didn't know his call was being recorded, because if that IS what he told Serino, we already know it's not true. There was NO exchange between GZ and TM before GZ got out of his car to pursue him, there is just GZ telling the operator that Trayvon has come up and looked at him. I will be very interested to see if GZ makes this claim on tape to the police because if so, it's a lie.

If a car is following someone on rainy dark night, it would reasonable and likely they would turn to see who it is, if they know them. Trayvon must have done that and then realized he didn't know him and became scared. His girlfriend probably told him then to run and he did. Then he thought he was safe and began walking. Is that possible?

 

[LolaMoon08]

If that story is what he told police then will it be admissable in the trial? I hope they read him his Miranda rights.

These are the same cops that were touching and searching George Zimmerman without gloves on --- and we're to expect them to think about giving George his Miranda warning? I will be shocked if they did! Shocked!

MOO

 

[2goldfish]

:clap:

There is an upside though. Now instead of calling 911, he can just yell down the hallway.

:floorlaugh: always the optimist :floorlaugh:

 

[SuziQ]

JMO, and this is really, JMO:twocents:...others mmv

I don't think Trayvon is more of a victim because of his age. I think, though, there are people who are working as had as possible to minimize and (in their minds) equalize this case.

And this is some of the tortured logic that I've seen all over the place...it goes something like this...:maddening:

1. T. Martin 17..close enough to an adult, yea, he's an adult
2. G. Zimmerman, 28, an adult
So, on points 1 and 2, they were basically "even." :wink:

3. T. Martin had some sort of high school record
4. G. Zimmerman had some sort of Florida police record
So, on points 3 and 4 they were basically "even".:wink:

5. T Martin deliberately wore clothes that "identified" him as a potential criminal.
6. G. Zimmerman was a dedicated volunteer crime fighter, always watching for potential criminals.
So, on points 5 and 6 they were basically "even." :wink:

7. T. Martin had tea and skittles on him.
8. G. Zimmerman had a 9mm on him.
They both had something, so on points 7 and 8 they were basically "even." :wink:

Get my point??? If you can just "equalize" things in a way that seems somewhat acceptable, then this case might just become a
"He said, He said." :banghead:


Gosh, that's sad, but understandable..move along, nothing to see here.

Except...that this case is more accurately a "He said, He dead."
And this kind of logic (IMO) is patently ridiculous.

Hitting the Thank You button was not enough! Thank You!!!

 

[katydid23]

I'm sure he wouldn't. LOL Just as a 3 year old doesn't care to be called a 'baby' by their mother (or anyone else) even though they still are.

Semantics. Semantics being used to illustrate he is less of a victim for some reason.

IMO

I don't think it is about him being less of a victim. I think people want to call him a child to portray him as less of a threat. A child does not seem threatening. Yet 17 yr old 'children' have committed quite a few violent crimes and even some murders, so he may have been seen as a threat, WRONGLY SO.

 

[grammieto5]

If a person is not arrested are they given their Miranda rights?

 

[rotterdam]

JMO: When this goes to trial, if GZ is not found guilty, I believe we are going to see the sixties repeat itself. Whatever the outcome is for GZ, it's bad.

I do not think so. If GZ is found not guilty, I believe the Feds will step in with a Civil Rights charge. Like they did with Rodney King, those cops in NOLA and many others.

 

[nomoresorrow]

(BBM)

These are the same cops that were touching and searching George Zimmerman without gloves on --- and we're to expect them to think about giving George his Miranda warning? I will be shocked if they did! Shocked!

MOO

:what: This is the first I'm hearing of this - Do you happen to have a link to this story? TIA. That just blows my mind, especially in light of the claim that GZ supposedly had been bleeding...

 

[2goldfish]

I don't think it is about him being less of a victim. I think people want to call him a child to portray him as less of a threat. A child does not seem threatening. Yet 17 yr old 'children' have committed quite a few violent crimes and even some murders, so he may have been seen as a threat, WRONGLY SO.

I think that it sounds "sadder" to say "a child was shot and killed" than to say "a 6'3" teenager was shot and killed" and I think both of those things are true, and either way to insist one is "truer" than the other is rather pointless compared to the greater issues here JMO IMO MOOOOO

 

[Adrienne37]

(BBM)


:what: This is the first I'm hearing of this - Do you happen to have a link to this story? TIA. That just blows my mind, especially in light of the claim that GZ supposedly had been bleeding...

If you will look at the surveillance video taken upon his arrival to the police station, you will see the cops patting him down without the use of any type of gloves.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/george-zimmerman-police-surveillance-16024475
~jmo~

 

[grammieto5]

So I went to Google, typed in Shoot First, and the article which came up stated one of the "rules" for using this law is for the person who shoots first has to believe he is preventing "the commission of a forcible felony" I wonder what felony GZ thought Trayvon was in the process of doing?

 

[HiHater]

In Florida a 17 yr old can get a license to drive a 4,000 lb. car.

Can, with parental or legal guardian consent, join the US military.

Can, with parental or legal guardian consent, become an emancipated minor.



http://www.dmv.org/fl-florida/teen-drivers.php

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_are_the_age_requirements_for_US_military_enlistment

http://www.ehow.com/facts_7482819_florida-laws-emancipation-minors-parents.html

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0743/0743.html

The age of majority in every state is 18. Until that point, the person is considered a minor. Trayvon was days past 16. He was not days from 18.

A person at 17 can join the military---with parental consent. They can get married---with parental consent. They be emancipated---with parental consent. How many decisions require parental consent when a person is over 18? None.

Trayvon couldn't vote, smoke, drink, sign a contract, or even own a GUN because of his age. He was a child.

Even if we disagree amongst ourselves that Trayvon is considered a child or not, there's no disputing the fact that George Zimmerman is a GROWN *advertiser censored** MAN; he should have had the mentality, reasonableness and rationality that goes with that status.

 

[nomoresorrow]

If you will look at the surveillance video taken upon his arrival to the police station, you will see the cops patting him down without the use of any type of gloves.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/george-zimmerman-police-surveillance-16024475
~jmo~

TY Adrienne, you're right. Guess I thought it was standard protocal - and just common sense - to always wear gloves in a professional setting when/wherever blood is involved. JMO~

 

[LolaMoon08]

I don't think it is about him being less of a victim. I think people want to call him a child to portray him as less of a threat. A child does not seem threatening. Yet 17 yr old 'children' have committed quite a few violent crimes and even some murders, so he may have been seen as a threat, WRONGLY SO.

I have a 17-year-old niece and I can tell you that she is not an adult? She may like to think she is sometimes, but she is not. She cannot buy cigarettes? She can not vote? She is protected under the "Child Labor Laws" of our wonderful Country. She has a strict curfew at home. She's not a child, but she's still just a kid! We never call victims like Chelsea King or Brittanee Drexel "adults" because we know they were just kids.

I don't think that anyone is trying to portray Trayvon as being less of a threat because he wasn't a threat at all.

You are 100% correct when you say that 17-year-old's can commit vile crimes. I just pointed out a case we had happen here recently... Trayvon was not one of "those" kids.

MOO

 

[Adrienne37]

So I went to Google, typed in Shoot First, and the article which came up stated one of the "rules" for using this law is for the person who shoots first has to believe he is preventing "the commission of a forcible felony" I wonder what felony GZ thought Trayvon was in the process of doing?

Yes and that's exactly what Angela Corey stated during an interview she had with Nancy Grace.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...dly-force-physical-force-second-degree-murder


~jmo~

 

[HiHater]

If a person is not arrested are they given their Miranda rights?

It depends. Any time a police officer is asking investigative questions, he or she should mirandize the subject. I'll say JMO, though.

 

[Adrienne37]

TY Adrienne, you're right. Guess I thought it was standard protocal - and just common sense - to always wear gloves in a professional setting when/wherever blood is involved. JMO~

You would think it is standard protocol particularly if someone is bleeding from injuries he sustained. It's very obvious by this video that there was no blood present anywhere on Zimmerman otherwise you would see the officers putting gloves on.


~jmo~